SCSII vs SATA for Web Server

[VFDking]

Hey guys,

I have a SP700 Dual Xeon, that I'm looking at setting up for a web server. It comes with a built in SCSII Ultra Wide controller. However I've put an SATA controller in it from Maxtor, to go with my 80GB Maxtor HD. How are SATA's for web server applications?

I have a SCSII HD in there as well, however the cable got ripped so I haven't been using it. My instinct would be to place the OS on the SATA, as well as the page file, on a partition, and then place the data from the MySQL server on the SCSII.

This seems like the best option for now, however I wanted to post to make sure that it is the best setup possible. Right now I'm not interested in having a dedicated Database server, as it's just not really feasible, and not nessisary.

Thanks in advance

 

[defakto]

Sounds like a decent plan. You want to pay attention to the number of IO/s that scsi drive can handle though as alot of older drives really can't perform the same as newer ide drives. An application like this some 10k or 15k drives would really drive up the database performance.

 

[feigned]

Right now I'm not interested in having a dedicated Database server, as it's just not really feasible, and not nessisary.

Then this thread is mostly moot, if only for giving you advice that you may or may not use in the future.

For the record, SCSI = low (random) seeks, which is ideal for DBs.

 

[VFDking]

Sounds like a decent plan. You want to pay attention to the number of IO/s that scsi drive can handle though as alot of older drives really can't perform the same as newer ide drives. An application like this some 10k or 15k drives would really drive up the database performance.

My scsi drive is fairly old, as it is the original drive that came with the computer, circa 1999. I just realized that my SATA drive that I had in the computer is gone as well. (lost in moving)

So it looks like I'm pretty open to solutions, what would you guys get for a storage solution that'll work well with my Dual Xeon. (i'm looking at economy to mid-range e-commerce)

Edit: I will be upgrading to having an independant database server by hopefully January. As well as a new e-com server. And I want the purchases that I make now to be able to transfer over

 

[dirtydr]

What kind of budget?

 

[VFDking]

What kind of budget?

I'll only be hosting a small T-Shirt startup companies website, who will have low hits.

My budget for the server in January will be around $2-3K however I want to start buying some of the components now.

Edit: If I can buy a few higher quality pieces at a time, it is easier to fit it into my budget

 

[tdg]

How much space do you need? SCSI drives are the best choice for any server, and idealy mirrored or a RAID5 array for the data disks for minimum downtime in case of a disk failure. ATA disks have made great strides in the last few years in terms of reliability, but SCSI is still the better choice if you can afford it.

 

[unhappy_mage]

SCSI drives are the best choice for any server, and idealy mirrored or a RAID5 array for the data disks for minimum downtime in case of a disk failure.

No raid 5. Raid 5 is okay for bulk storage, but *not* databases. I'd start off with a raid 1 array, or a 0+1. Buy a controller that supports expanding the array, but don't count on it working - plan on industrial-strength backups NOW. Offsite is good.

If you haven't considered using Linux, now is the time. Set up a machine with it at home to get experience, set up a mockup of your server, and do some load testing. I'd use Debian-stable for this, but others will have other opinions.

 

[dirtydr]

If I can buy a few higher quality pieces at a time, it is easier to fit it into my budget

You might want to nail down whichever motherboard will be used in the upcoming machine before picking out a raid controller. At least that way you'll know what slot's you have to work with (pcie or pcix) and not be forced into anything.

 

[VFDking]

You might want to nail down whichever motherboard will be used in the upcoming machine before picking out a raid controller.

I'm glad you brought up the PCI-X dilema. I didn't realize that newer high end RAID controllers require a different type of slot, so I can't get a high end RAID in my SP700.

In that case it looks like I'll probably just get an SATA for a home use file server, and host the website offsite for the time being.

This will give me a chance to start building my server slowly, starting with the mobo. Does anybody have any recommendations on a good server motherboard to go with, around $2-350 USD. PCI-X is required, because I will want to go with a RAID 1 array. I probably will purchase it at the end of the month.

F.Y.I.
Linux is defenetly a must, this is a webserver, not a desktop after all.

On a different note, I have tried 4 different linux distros and none of them will work on the SP700. I've tried compiling everything from scratch. Aperently my friend who i got it off of had Slackware running on it, but when he came over and tried to 'do it again' he had no luck either. We tried, Fedora, Slackware, Suse and Gentoo on it, I was just kinda pissed off that it wouldn't work and wouldn't give up on it for a month or so.

 

[unhappy_mage]

1) For raid 1 you probably won't need an offboard controller.

2) I'd try Debian. Etch, maybe, because it's not production stuff. What problem exactly do you have with it? What type of drive are you installing to, and on what controller?

 

[VFDking]

1) For raid 1 you probably won't need an offboard controller.
2) I'd try Debian. Etch, maybe, because it's not production stuff. What problem exactly do you have with it? What type of drive are you installing to, and on what controller?

I'm going to have to buy a new hard drive, the controller is a Maxtor SATA/150. What hard drive should I get now that I would be able to use in my server when I update? Will a new SCSII work on my old SP700 controller?
Edit: I have to check my controller on my mobo, I checked the specs and it shipped with either a

Symbios Wide Ultra2 SCSI PCI Controller (on models with Ultra2 drives) 68-pin
Integrated Dual Channel Wide-Ultra SCSI Controller (all models) 50-pin

I'm pretty sure I got the second one (as it is an integrated controller)

I had no problem with any of the distros detecting my hard drive and controller. I could get into the shell with no problem, and if I was content to have a system without a GUI I could be running it right now. I tried compiling the GUI on the system, and it wouldn't go. (the error had had something to do with the kernal if I remember)

I'll probably end up putting windoze back on it, and just go that way. It's pretty stable, and I have a .NET project that I've been working on, and the dual xeons seem to handle the development environment fairly well.

 

[dirtydr]

Does anybody have any recommendations on a good server motherboard to go with, around $2-350 USD. PCI-X is required, because I will want to go with a RAID 1 array.

Intel or AMD would be the first decision . I dont believe you can go wrong either way these days. The xeons and opterons are both solid units. I'd probably go with the dual core opteron(s) but that is just my preference. Which brings up the next question, single or dual cpu?

I would always use a dedicated scsi raid controller but again that would be my preference. Plenty to choose from starting around $200. Coupled with four 15k rpm cheetah's (one for the os, two for the array and a spare, or all 4 used in a 0+1 array, or 1 os & a 3 drive level 5, etc) would put the disk system right around $1000.

 

[unhappy_mage]

What video card are you using? Also, for a server it's actually better not to have a GUI; you're not going to be at the box all the time, and it's good to be able to administer it remotely via ssh.

 

[VFDking]

What video card are you using? Also, for a server it's actually better not to have a GUI; you're not going to be at the box all the time, and it's good to be able to administer it remotely via ssh.

I was using a Hercules GeForce3 64MB card. Anyways you make a valid point, the GUI is completely un-nessisary for a server. Will the 15K RPM cheetahs work with a standard PCI controller? i'm considering grabing an interm PCI RAID controller as my onboard controller is only a 50-pin.

 

[unhappy_mage]

Sure. What generation Cheetahs? You'll probably want to find at least a u160 controller, but they will/should work on anything. The offboard is probably a good idea anyways, lest you have to buy expensive convertors. Probably faster, too.

Beware of heat with Cheetahs. I hear the 15k.2s are particularly bad - they've been known to cook themselves.

 

[dirtydr]

Beware of heat with Cheetahs. I hear the 15k.2s are particularly bad - they've been known to cook themselves.

Indeed a good word of caution. Even the 10k's are scorchers. A few hdd coolers will keep this in check.

If you are absolutely certain the future system will be built around a board with pci-x slots there is no reason to hold back on the controller. pci-x is backwards compatable with pci or at least the 1st generation was. A quick email to the manufacturer should verify this or prove me wrong . This should make migrating the raid as easy as plugging in the controller & drives as opposed to rebuilding the array on the new controller and restoring data from a backup.

The primary reason I'd go this route, if the controller you are looking at will work in the current setup, is that the price for a decent u160 controller on ebay is not too far shy of a new entry level u320 controller. This assuming you dont need one that supports level 5.

<edit>

Thought I should also say there is nothing wrong going with a complete u160 setup. You would still have great performance and save some money. If you did decide to go that route the ebay controllers look much more attractive imho.

 

[VFDking]

Thought I should also say there is nothing wrong going with a complete u160 setup. You would still have great performance and save some money. If you did decide to go that route the ebay controllers look much more attractive imho.

Edited:
I have had problems with ebay in the past so unless you can recommend a good seller it'd be difficult for me to go with ebay again.

I looked up some heating solutions for the hard drives, and I have a few in mind.

Edit:
I Think I'm going to with a dual opteron mobo , i was looking at the quad ones as well. How well does a quad opteron perform compared to 2 dual opterons (lets say quad opteron 4 GB ram as compared to 2 dual opterons at 2GB ram)

 

[unhappy_mage]

I Think I'm going to with a dual opteron mobo , i was looking at the quad ones as well. How well does a quad opteron perform compared to 2 dual opterons (lets say quad opteron 4 GB ram as compared to 2 dual opterons at 2GB ram)

Probably about the same, but it'll be expensive as... something very expensive. If you're gonna go for that class of machine, Sun makes some nice boxen with some nice specs. Start with their "low-end" stuff, though - *probably* don't need an e25k. List Price: $1,020,142.00 Something like an x4200 would do you. I don't know if they're still using the eBay store like they were for a while, but you could find some *really* good deals in there.

 

[VFDking]

lol, a million bucks is kinda out of my price range. you can get quad opteron boards around $1,500, and that way it would be an extremely scalable system. Although my mouth did water when I was reading about the T1 'green' CPU by sun earlier.

There was a formula for multiprocessing machines that said that everytime you add a CPU the amount that it helps you goes down due to the overhead of managing multiple processors. However I think at 4 CPUs it would still be more economical than 2 completely seperate systems.

 

[unhappy_mage]

Two machines will be better than one. That means you can set up a LVS cluster. This is pretty awesome stuff - N machines appear as one to the outside world, automatic transparent failover, incredible scalability, etc... but it's pretty dang tricky to set up.

The other alternative is to just set up two seperate servers, and use DNS round-robin to load balance. This is a lot easier, and provides some of the same scalability, but it's not as expandable, and not as flexible.

But on the gripping hand, you probably don't need even two Optys for a company of the size I think you're talking about. Heck, probably don't even need a whole Celeron

 

[VFDking]

Haha,

Too true, I guess I'll just have to see how everything works out. Other than upgrading my scsii and sata, I probably won't have to do much for the near future, possibly a little bit more ram, bump it up to a gig. Although I think by january I'll be ready to play around with a bit more power. That way I'll be able to start testing, and trying to get that clustering that your talking about going.

 

[dirtydr]

Sounds like that $2-3K budget has trippled!!!

A single cpu would offer more than enough power. Especially if you go the dual core route... very 'futureproof'. Don't get me wrong that would be a damn nice setup but even if I had that kind of money I'd build an army of 'lesser' boxes to do my bidding.

Rendering on that 8-way beast would have to be mighty impressive though.

 

[VFDking]

Sounds like that $2-3K budget has trippled!!!

A single cpu would offer more than enough power. Especially if you go the dual core route... very 'futureproof'. Don't get me wrong that would be a damn nice setup but even if I had that kind of money I'd build an army of 'lesser' boxes to do my bidding.

Rendering on that 8-way beast would have to be mighty impressive though.

lol justifying a quad board would be rather difficult, but I am trying.

A couple months back a friend of mine and I were playing around with the idea of getting an army of spark boxes to do our bidding. I think they clock in at around 200 Mhz. However, because he worked (key word: 'worked') at a computer recycling depot, the price tag on these boxes was going to be next to nothing. Our thinking was the price is right, and if we can get a node of 20 or so going we could conquer the world.

The story behind the spark boxes is that they are a rack mount server and although they were not popular in North America, they were the ones powering the Red Armies goals for world domination. Their main plus is that they are extremely stable, and have very high uptimes.

On a side note the Xeons that I'm playing with right now is a biproduct of the recycling depot.

 

[TeeJayHoward]

lol justifying a quad board would be rather difficult, but I am trying.

A couple months back a friend of mine and I were playing around with the idea of getting an army of spark boxes to do our bidding. I think they clock in at around 200 Mhz. However, because he worked (key word: 'worked') at a computer recycling depot, the price tag on these boxes was going to be next to nothing. Our thinking was the price is right, and if we can get a node of 20 or so going we could conquer the world.

The story behind the spark boxes is that they are a rack mount server and although they were not popular in North America, they were the ones powering the Red Armies goals for world domination. Their main plus is that they are extremely stable, and have very high uptimes.

On a side note the Xeons that I'm playing with right now is a biproduct of the recycling depot.

Spark boxes? The old sun SPARCs? Aren't they the equivilent of 386's - P-IIs? I'm fairly certain any modern processor will stomp even a 20-node cluster of these.

 

[VFDking]

Spark boxes? The old sun SPARCs? Aren't they the equivilent of 386's - P-IIs? I'm fairly certain any modern processor will stomp even a 20-node cluster of these.

yes indeed the old sun SPARCs. The ones in question were close to the PII end of the spectrum, and my analogies of taking over the world were fairly exagerated. The only reason why it was on the drawing board was because I had access to a plethora of these computers (as nobody else wanted them) and a very low budget.

My budget has increased, and my access to these antiques has disapeared. Although a modern computer may kick the crap out of 20 of these computers, I for one was willing to find out.